3 ms·

As would I, but I wouldn't get into an argument with someone about cancer research because I have never studied cancer in any depth. Except I'm not arguing. Yo

by tomlin 16y ago

As would I, but I wouldn't get into an argument with someone about cancer research because I have never studied cancer in any depth. Except I'm not arguing. You've created an argument out of a thought, which is, to strive for stability and equality. All I've stated thus far is that Capitalism is a stepping stone to something better. No matter how many times I repeat this, you are asserting an argument. That is simply not true. The core principal of capitalism is that people engage in mutually beneficial transactions without the threat of physical harm. This is the core idea of the free market. Now, here comes the argument. The core idea of the free market is religion. I've read a lot about, and at one time considered myself a Libertarian. I've heard about the "promise land" of free markets for some time. For a while I was hypnotized by that ideal, but we humans operate on incentives. Some people call it greed, but I don't want to demonize a population. Capitalism isn't evil, it's a cloak. The promise of success keeps us all herding towards the door of opportunity, but only a few pass almost regardless of intelligence, morals, motivations or intentions. When your insurance refuses coverage, it isn't because there's an evil asshole lurking to ensure you don't get what you deserve. Company A announces incentives for employers for saving the company money. Those who aren't on-board get reviews, get fired. The workers who respond to incentives deny your claim. You're now fucked, to put it lightly. Company A is now full of incentive-driven bias. This is just 1 course of Capitalism. You don't need me to dig up research or some book about societal structure and how it applies to Capitalism. You see it everyday. Please go read some literature on this. And I don't mean that in a negative way. You seem genuinely open to new ideas but you seemingly are not willing to seek those new ideas. I plan to. And yes, I am very open and very willing to seek new ideas and support those with more knowledge and more ability to drive these efforts. However, I am not willing to listen to steadfast, obstinate reasoning for future consideration. I appreciate that there are those (like yourself) that don't put up with the hearsay and nonsensical banter, but I'm not your target. I'm just voting for innovation.

tkahn6 16y ago
All I've stated thus far is that Capitalism is a stepping stone to something better. That is in itself an argument. You are asserting that capitalism is not an ideal system but you are not backing up that assertion. The core idea of the free market is religion. What does this mean? And you don't even back up this claim. but we humans operate on incentives. Yes. The entire point of the free market is that people act in their own self interest. I can't semantically parse the rest of your text. Can you try restating it? Capitalism isn't evil, it's a cloak. The promise of success keeps us all herding towards the door of opportunity, but only a few pass almost regardless of intelligence, morals, motivations or intentions. When your insurance refuses coverage, it isn't because there's an evil asshole lurking to ensure you don't get what you deserve. Company A announces incentives for employers for saving the company money. Those who aren't on-board get reviews, get fired. The workers who respond to incentives deny your claim. You're now fucked, to put it lightly. Company A is now full of incentive-driven bias. This is just 1 course of Capitalism. You don't need me to dig up research or some book about societal structure and how it applies to Capitalism. You see it everyday. I don't understand any of this.
- loewenskind 16y ago
  >That is in itself an argument. You are asserting that capitalism is not an ideal system but you are not backing up that assertion. I'm not sure he was asserting as much as hoping or maybe suggesting. You sound like you're getting close to asserting that it is an ideal system though. Care to back that up? Neither claim could be backed up without trying different systems, but surely you have more optimism than to think what we have now is the best we can ever do.
  - tkahn6 16y ago
    Ahhh What we have now is not the best we can do, but what we have isn't capitalism. So to claim that capitalism is the "beneath us as a society" means nothing because it's never been tried here. EDIT: And, if you've read the comments above, it's clear that, by his own admission, tomlin has never studied any economic system.
    - loewenskind 16y ago
      I'd be interested to know what would need to happen for us to have a system that meets your definition of "capitalism". As far as I know the purest for that was ever attempted was in Chile under Pinochet. The "Chicago Boys" were given pretty much free reign, they tried to make the system just as Milton Friedman taught them and it was failing pretty spectacularly until they "slid the scale a little more toward socialism", if you will. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Chile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Chile
      - tkahn6 16y ago
        Well first of all, it's not my definition of capitalism. It's Adam Smith's. When people think of 'capitalism' they usually think of anarchy and large mega-corporations that destroy the environment and do whatever the hell they want. There is regulation under capitalism. The government exists to protect private property, life, and to prosecute those who commit fraud. The recent financial crisis was primarily caused by millions of homeowners defaulting on their loans. I guess a first step we could take would be to 1) stop teaching kids that home ownership is necessary to be 'American', 2) stop giving out government-financed loans to first-time homeowners (through Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac) and 3) to shift regulation from capping what banks and mutual funds can do to making sure they aren't committing fraud. I'm not an economist but I think it's clear that the fact that the government (under Reagan ironically), made it its mission to put American's in homes. Great. But of course what happened was that many of these people that were initially given loans through this program defaulted on them.

by tomlin 16y ago

tkahn6 16y ago

All I've stated thus far is that Capitalism is a stepping stone to something better. That is in itself an argument. You are asserting that capitalism is not an ideal system but you are not backing up that assertion. The core idea of the free market is religion. What does this mean? And you don't even back up this claim. but we humans operate on incentives. Yes. The entire point of the free market is that people act in their own self interest. I can't semantically parse the rest of your text. Can you try restating it? Capitalism isn't evil, it's a cloak. The promise of success keeps us all herding towards the door of opportunity, but only a few pass almost regardless of intelligence, morals, motivations or intentions. When your insurance refuses coverage, it isn't because there's an evil asshole lurking to ensure you don't get what you deserve. Company A announces incentives for employers for saving the company money. Those who aren't on-board get reviews, get fired. The workers who respond to incentives deny your claim. You're now fucked, to put it lightly. Company A is now full of incentive-driven bias. This is just 1 course of Capitalism. You don't need me to dig up research or some book about societal structure and how it applies to Capitalism. You see it everyday. I don't understand any of this.

loewenskind 16y ago
>That is in itself an argument. You are asserting that capitalism is not an ideal system but you are not backing up that assertion. I'm not sure he was asserting as much as hoping or maybe suggesting. You sound like you're getting close to asserting that it is an ideal system though. Care to back that up? Neither claim could be backed up without trying different systems, but surely you have more optimism than to think what we have now is the best we can ever do.
- tkahn6 16y ago
  Ahhh What we have now is not the best we can do, but what we have isn't capitalism. So to claim that capitalism is the "beneath us as a society" means nothing because it's never been tried here. EDIT: And, if you've read the comments above, it's clear that, by his own admission, tomlin has never studied any economic system.
  - loewenskind 16y ago
    I'd be interested to know what would need to happen for us to have a system that meets your definition of "capitalism". As far as I know the purest for that was ever attempted was in Chile under Pinochet. The "Chicago Boys" were given pretty much free reign, they tried to make the system just as Milton Friedman taught them and it was failing pretty spectacularly until they "slid the scale a little more toward socialism", if you will. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Chile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Chile
    - tkahn6 16y ago
      Well first of all, it's not my definition of capitalism. It's Adam Smith's. When people think of 'capitalism' they usually think of anarchy and large mega-corporations that destroy the environment and do whatever the hell they want. There is regulation under capitalism. The government exists to protect private property, life, and to prosecute those who commit fraud. The recent financial crisis was primarily caused by millions of homeowners defaulting on their loans. I guess a first step we could take would be to 1) stop teaching kids that home ownership is necessary to be 'American', 2) stop giving out government-financed loans to first-time homeowners (through Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac) and 3) to shift regulation from capping what banks and mutual funds can do to making sure they aren't committing fraud. I'm not an economist but I think it's clear that the fact that the government (under Reagan ironically), made it its mission to put American's in homes. Great. But of course what happened was that many of these people that were initially given loans through this program defaulted on them.